A federal judge again Friday ordered agents in Chicago for immigration operations to wear and turn on their body cameras, telling them “that was not a suggestion.”
U.S. District Judge Sara Ellis issued the order Thursday, citing concerns about increasingly violent clashes between federal agents deployed in Operation Midway Blitz and the public, and their use of tear gas against protesters.
Ellis said her order requires any federal agents working under Operation Midway Blitz to wear body cameras and keep them on during all “law enforcement activities.”
If you’re not doing anything wrong, you’ll have nothing to worry about. Isn’t that the usual line?
Judge issues the most reasonable requirement in law enforcement “this act of extreme judicial activism will not stand!”
Hopeing the judge starts issuing arrest warrants. She won’t, but some time behind bars would finally be some consequences.
If there’s any one group of people in our society I’d support having always-on cameras, (like Larry Ellison, soon to be part owner of TikTok claims all people should have) it would be law enforcement agents.
You do not get to wield that much power over people without personal sacrifice.
“It’s a violation of my privacy!”- you’re on the job and have the power to ruin or even end someone’s life. Deal with it. Privacy for the governed, not for the wielders of government power.
like Larry Ellison, soon to be part owner of TikTok claims all people should have
As with so many other ideas these assholes have, I think Larry should go first. Let’s try having him under 24/7 surveillance, along with every other billionaire, as a trial we do for a few years.
We’ll call it something cool, like A/B testing, where the billionaires are under surveillance as the test group and everyone else is treated like a free citizen in a free country.
Only after we see how it goes with billionaires for several years and have very public hearings about it, only then can we even talk about it for everyone else…
“b-b-but you don’t understand! My system wouldn’t publicize the data and would only keep it visible to a small group of… trusted employees, who could only see it with a court order! It’s only a coincidence the people in charge of that team are also being paid by me!”
I would like to see politicians have always-on cameras as well. No more backroom deal bullshit.
Welp, there goes Grindr, then. 🤷🏼♂️
That’s part of the plan. 😏
Let’s take all that “judge issues verbal ‘smackdown’ to government lawyers who aren’t the source of problem and don’t even want to be there at this point” energy, and push it over to:
“And since you can’t follow court orders, I’m directing the prosecution to draw up an order for me to sign designating which law enforcement body is going to be enforcing this on your officers going forward. Any federal personnel not wearing an activated body camera, starting on Tuesday, are going to be subjected to a 3-day stay in custody for civil contempt of my order. I trust they won’t attempt to resist that enforcement and so they won’t have to face criminal charges for obstruction, is that right, counsel?”
I’d like to up your suggestion one notch, how about any charges brought by federal agents not complying with judicial order are summarily dismissed with prejudice. ANY charge. Trespass? Dismissed. Disorderly conduct? DIsmissed. Punching a nazi in the face? Dismissed.
Add in "agents without an active body cam cannot be considered to be acting in an official capacity at the time, and therefore do not have immunity from state charges granted under the supremacy clause, nor do they have qualified imunity. "
Then were cooking.
…“and therefore will be considered to be thugs with illegal firearms menacing the public.”
CASTLE DOCTRINE, MUTHAFUCKAS !
Or is that just a defence for wipepo ?
That is generally how it works, that’s why reading Miranda is something that’s always done. It’s called “fruit of the poisoned tree.” I have no idea if it’ll play out that way, but given that they’ve had trouble even getting grand juries to return indictments in the first place it seems pretty plausible.
Maybe I wasn’t clear yesterday; that wasn’t a suggestion," she told lawyers for the Trump administration. “I am modifying the temporary restraining order to include body-worn cameras.”
“It’s not up for debate,” she added.
Plaster that on a shirt and wear it everywhere. Church, work, school, getting ice cream, watching an old movie at the drive-in you like, on a fishing boat, at a horse track, picking up gummies, during sex…
Any arrest should be nullified if the agent isn’t recording with their bodycam.
They don’t arrest people, they disappear them.
Can the camera order be nullified if they aren’t performing “law enforcement activity”? We already know these are not legal
arrestskidnappings.
It is if there are no consequences for NOT wearing one.
Yeah, that’s what’s going to win the day. Defeatist whining.
Keep it up, Eeyore. We didn’t storm the beaches of Normandy without a violin in every hand.
You haven’t stormed shit in decades other than your unclean porcelain throne, gramps. Simmer down.
Okay fascist.
So lazy you can’t even scroll some rando’s post history. Aww, bless your heart. Seems like you’re as much an invalid as invalid. 🤣🖕🏼
Oh so you claim you’re against fascism but you want people to give up against fascism?
Is it that you’re stupid enough to hold both of those opinions paradoxically or are you just one of those obnoxious contrarians that has to oppose even good things just to get the attention your parents forgot to give you?
I do make an effort to not talk to complete morons clumsily swinging at their own shadow, so 🤦🏼♂️🖕🏼
Did the judge include steep penalties on switching the cameras off and such shennegans?
I wonder where all those body cameras will come from. That new electronics manufacturer in Alabama? or China with that 130% tariff that el jefe imposed?
Doesn’t matter.
Oh shucks: they can’t go beat up brown people for funzies until the Amazon delivery guy shows up.
Can’t train ai Skynet when cameras are off
